<quoted text>Laws requiring me to drive on the right side of the road are metaphorical rape, because they infringe on my wishes....You messed up cretin. Stop trivializing rape with your hysterical, unhinged comparisons to it.

I suspect you are the same one who has posted under the name of HiHi and one other I just can't recall at this time. Spotted Girl may be a lot of things, but uneducated and intellectually stunted is not one of them. I have clashed a nnumber of times with her in the past and let me quarantee you that she is anything but intellectually challenged.

<quoted text>Laws requiring me to drive on the right side of the road are metaphorical rape, because they infringe on my wishes....You messed up cretin. Stop trivializing rape with your hysterical, unhinged comparisons to it.

Make that a lot odf other IDs. Your Philadelphia location and your idiotic use of cretin to describe anybody you disagree with gives you away

<quoted text>Make that a lot odf other IDs. Your Philadelphia location and your idiotic use of cretin to describe anybody you disagree with gives you away

He confuses invalid rules (dress codes, telling others what to eat) which affect only single individuals and confuse them with valid things driving laws and other things that physically and directly affect OTHERS. Metaphorical "rape" is interfering in things which ONLY affect the individual who does them. Dressing as you want only affects you, others have no right to notice nor comment, IMHO, since they are on YOUR body. Driving laws are for the benefit of all. If you drive on the wrong side of the road, you could kill someone. But there is no way what I eat can make you sick (unless you have untreated mental illness that makes you sick when you see unattractive persons or persons making choices you disagree with). There is no way that me being a student wearing a bunch of facial piercings can physically harm another person or to drop dead.

My first post was a sideways comment designed to not be discussed. It was a throwaway comment to make a larger point. The point was, since dress codes are a type of rape since they exert immoral control over another on an issue that ONLY affects the person who does whatever, then the teacher might as well use the school-issued laptop to get practice screwing.

Tighter dress codes are not needed, just punishing students who react to what is worn by another student. Teach them to look down, straight ahead, at their book/screen/device, or the teacher, and to express no feelings at all about what others do as long as it is not directly to them. Likewise, what a student says online while at home is ONLY the business of the parents, or the law if it was truly against the law. Don't punish the students who say whatever no matter how offensive it is, at least not at school. If it is threatening, call the law and not involve the school, and if it violates the faculties civil rights, it is a matter for their lawyers and the courts, again not a school matter. If disruption is a problem, then punish the students repeating it or making it viral across campus, particularly if they are breaking policies like cell phone use. Teach every student to be accountable for how they act at school and what they share at school. Teach them that EVERYONE has free speech and that what others say or do away from school gives them no right to use such materials to disrupt class. So punish the ones snickering or bullying, not the ones generating content in their own home, on their own time, using their own bandwidth and equipment.

These are all my personal opinions. So they are neither right nor wrong, but my property, and I am entitled to have them no matter what.

In high school I had one English teacher, she wasn't 'spoken' but damn she was fine and I thought so at the time, she took a liking to me and I was one of those lucky boys who fit her profile and yes, I got a real education out of her for nearly 3 years starting in halfway through the sophomore season. She wasn't my first, but she was the best! At least for back then, she was very discreet and as soon as he learned I knew how to keep my mouth shut (I knew that if I bragged about it to anybody they either wouldn't believe me, or I'd ruin the good thing I had going) it started out by me going to her house "to do odd jobs" but then we started meeting at a motel room she paid for. Not all the time, a couple of times a month is all but it was great! She shall remain nameless here, but I have fond memories of my high school education – for an education it certainly was! She was one nasty teacher, at least on her own time away from school. To this day I have absolutely no problem with teacher/student get-togethers because contrary to what the law says people at that age I believe are more than capable of making the decision, whether or not they want to get involved in that kind of relationship. If I ever find out one of our kids is hanging with a teacher after hours, I will certainly not make trouble over it.

<quoted text>He confuses invalid rules (dress codes, telling others what to eat) which affect only single individuals and confuse them with valid things driving laws and other things that physically and directly affect OTHERS. Metaphorical "rape" is interfering in things which ONLY affect the individual who does them. Dressing as you want only affects you, others have no right to notice nor comment, IMHO, since they are on YOUR body. Driving laws are for the benefit of all. If you drive on the wrong side of the road, you could kill someone. But there is no way what I eat can make you sick (unless you have untreated mental illness that makes you sick when you see unattractive persons or persons making choices you disagree with). There is no way that me being a student wearing a bunch of facial piercings can physically harm another person or to drop dead.My first post was a sideways comment designed to not be discussed. It was a throwaway comment to make a larger point. The point was, since dress codes are a type of rape since they exert immoral control over another on an issue that ONLY affects the person who does whatever, then the teacher might as well use the school-issued laptop to get practice screwing.Tighter dress codes are not needed, just punishing students who react to what is worn by another student. Teach them to look down, straight ahead, at their book/screen/device, or the teacher, and to express no feelings at all about what others do as long as it is not directly to them. Likewise, what a student says online while at home is ONLY the business of the parents, or the law if it was truly against the law. Don't punish the students who say whatever no matter how offensive it is, at least not at school. If it is threatening, call the law and not involve the school, and if it violates the faculties civil rights, it is a matter for their lawyers and the courts, again not a school matter. If disruption is a problem, then punish the students repeating it or making it viral across campus, particularly if they are breaking policies like cell phone use. Teach every student to be accountable for how they act at school and what they share at school. Teach them that EVERYONE has free speech and that what others say or do away from school gives them no right to use such materials to disrupt class. So punish the ones snickering or bullying, not the ones generating content in their own home, on their own time, using their own bandwidth and equipment.These are all my personal opinions. So they are neither right nor wrong, but my property, and I am entitled to have them no matter what.

Although I respect your opinion SG, I cannot agree since you are exaggerating a well worn point here. Mandating how a person must conform, be it by dress code, conduct, respect of authorities, etc. is by no means rape, even if it is at an individual level. Conforming to social order is enforced in schools to instill compliance, and respect of authority. It is also a means of ensuring equality, regardless of race or creed. Imagine our military without these rules – soldiers wearing what they please, waking up at times more preferable to their liking, taking the whole 'no thanks, I’d rather stay in today' alternative whenever they pleased. It would be chaos. Correction – it would be a number of things, but it would not be a manageable military. I know from many of your past posts you have issues with authority, especially schools, and I highly respect that – I too am rebellious to many customs and social orders. But there is a line. If you let youth carry on as they please, you are only hurting them. When a young adult becomes an adult he can conduct his life any way he pleases (as long it is within the confines of the law) but then again it will be he or she that must deal with the consequences, i.e. unemployment, homelessness, etc.

Although I respect your opinion SG, I cannot agree since you are exaggerating a well worn point here. Mandating how a person must conform, be it by dress code, conduct, respect of authorities, etc. is by no means rape, even if it is at an individual level. Conforming to social order is enforced in schools to instill compliance, and respect of authority. It is also a means of ensuring equality, regardless of race or creed. Imagine our military without these rules – soldiers wearing what they please, waking up at times more preferable to their liking, taking the whole 'no thanks, I’d rather stay in today' alternative whenever they pleased. It would be chaos. Correction – it would be a number of things, but it would not be a manageable military. I know from many of your past posts you have issues with authority, especially schools, and I highly respect that – I too am rebellious to many customs and social orders. But there is a line. If you let youth carry on as they please, you are only hurting them. When a young adult becomes an adult he can carry on any way he pleases (as long it is within the confines of the law) but then again it will be he or she that must deal with the consequences, i.e. unemployment, homelessness, etc.

<quoted text>Although I respect your opinion SG, I cannot agree since you are exaggerating a well worn point here. Mandating how a person must conform, be it by dress code, conduct, respect of authorities, etc. is by no means rape, even if it is at an individual level. Conforming to social order is enforced in schools to instill compliance, and respect of authority. It is also a means of ensuring equality, regardless of race or creed. Imagine our military without these rules – soldiers wearing what they please, waking up at times more preferable to their liking, taking the whole 'no thanks, I’d rather stay in today' alternative whenever they pleased. It would be chaos. Correction – it would be a number of things, but it would not be a manageable military. I know from many of your past posts you have issues with authority, especially schools, and I highly respect that – I too am rebellious to many customs and social orders. But there is a line. If you let youth carry on as they please, you are only hurting them. When a young adult becomes an adult he can conduct his life any way he pleases (as long it is within the confines of the law) but then again it will be he or she that must deal with the consequences, i.e. unemployment, homelessness, etc.

Respect for authority is not "rape", but EXCESSIVE dress codes are. Again, it is only "rape" if it is limits on what only impact individuals. What a person wears has ALL to do with self-expression, and nothing to do with disrespect. It is disrespectful to notice, care, or negatively comment on what others wear. Students should be exposed to different styles non-stop with severe punishment for the least criticism of what *OTHERS* wear or eat.

Yes, all should learn from consequences, but adding or producing ANY artificial ones is immoral and wrong, when it is not something that inherently harms OTHERS. So is artificially removing consequences or protecting anyone from them.

Dressing a certain way has nothing to do with respect. If someone is so shallow, egotistic, self-important, and stupid to think it does, they have no right to work anywhere. If a CEO has to have others to dress a certain way and lacks the self control to ignore what others wear and tell themselves it has nothing to do with them, just the other person and it is not their place to notice or care, then it is the duty of the shareholders to remove this worthless, self-important, CEO and replace them with someone who respects the rights of their employees and doesn't waste their time with such superficial things. Such an immoral, self-important person needs to be kept from any decent job.

Social order is a good thing, but it should be limited to behavior while at work or school or in public, never to what someone eats or wears in *any* context. Acting disrespectful is a problem. There is no way to dress "disrespectful" unless it it involves display of certain body parts (a behavior), or displays attitudes that are against society or segments of it. Obviously, objectifying groups or promoting violence against anyone is out. Like I said, dress codes are ONLY valid when other people are directly impacted. So wearing unsafe clothes (long hair around machines/engines, long trains at any place but a wedding or modeling event, spikes, weapons, sharp objects, spurs, cleats anywhere but on an athletic field, etc), deliberately offensive clothes, or clothes promoting harmful behaviors or attitudes, now that is different. Just wearing a nosering is not unsafe nor infringes on the civil rights nor respect of others. If others think it is disruptive or disrespectful, then THEY have the problem and need dealt with very firmly. We need to get rid of outdated, overly formal norms and stop pretending everything is disrespectful.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.